Master Neil S/O Dr. Sanjay Bang Thr. Father And Natural Guardian Dr. Sanjay Vijay Bang v. The Maharashtra State Board For Secondary And Higher Secondary Education, Pune And Others

1/2 WP5622.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 5622 OF 2016 Master Neil s/o Dr. Sanjay Bang -vsThe Maharashtra State Board for Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.

or directions and Registrar's orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr.N.S.Bhattad, counsel for the petitioner.

Mr.Anand Parchure, counsel for the respondent No.2. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK & MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : 02.12.2016.

By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction against the respondent No.2-Maharashtra State Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board, Amravati Division, Amravati to constitute a revaluation committee to reassess the petitioner's geography paper for standard 10th examination, held in March, 2016. The petitioner had appeared at the secondary school certificate examination and had secured 92.6% marks in aggregate. The petitioner had submitted all the papers of the 10th standard examination for revaluation. Twenty marks of the petitioner were increased in all, but in the subject of geography, there was no change even after revaluation. According to the petitioner, the petitioner had answered the questions correctly and he should have been awarded more marks than that are awarded to him. It is stated that the petitioner has answered more than what is provided in the key answers/model answers.

We are not inclined to entertain the writ petition and interfere with the marks awarded to the petitioner after revaluation. The courts would normally not interfere in academic matters, specially when a student claims that he/she is awarded lesser marks than

2/2 WP5622.16 his/her expectation. It would not be for this court after the petitioner's answer paper is valued and revalued to consider whether the answers of the petitioner in the geography paper are as per the key or model answers or not.

In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE KHUNTE